tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 18 07:36:10 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: Hoch

• From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: Hoch
• Date: Thu, 18 Feb 99 10:26:55 EST

ja' peHruS:
>ghobe'

wejpuH.
 
 
 
 
va.
 
 
Hu'tegh.

Hu'tegh ghay'cha'. 
Qu'vatlh ghuy'cha' baQa'.  QI'yaH.

tlhuH.  wa', cha', wej, loS, vagh, jav, Soch, chorgh, Hut, wa'maH.
Okay, I'm better now.  Sorry for the outburst.

peHruS, what about my description of {nIn naQ} vs {nIn Hoch} do you 
not understand or not agree with?  I *really* want to help you figure
it out, but if all you say is "no" then I don't know how to continue.

-- ghunchu'wI'

• Prev by Date: Re: ma'veq: It's official
• Next by Date: -pu' - WAS Re: ma'veq: It's official
• Prev by thread: Re: Hoch
• Next by thread: Re: Hoch
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level